Environmental Equity
Biology Senior Seminar
Amy Lyons
Thesis: Environmental racism is a major source
of the inequities of quality of life seen in minority communities compared
to white communities.
Outline:
I. Introduction: technological expansion and
its effects on the human population
II. General definition of environmental racism: The
Problem
A. Factors of environmental racism
1. poverty
2. race
B. Examples of environmental racism
C. Health effects of hazardous
waste
III. Government policy/law- government response
to environmental racism
IV. Environmental activism: public/community
response to environmental racism
A. What organizations have confronted this issue?
B. How has the community fought for their rights?
V. The future: ending environmental racism: education,
empowerment, non-
cooperation.
VI. Works cited and bibliography
Introduction
"...We live in a breakable takeable world, an ever available possible
worldÖ" These words, by poet and singer-songwriter Ani Difranco,
articulate the relationship between the environment and its inhabitants.
Society is constantly manipulating the environment. Our capacity for changing
the environment is kept in check by the destructible aspect of nature. The
changes we make, those advancements in technology, are limited. While the
industrial revolution, per say, is over, industry is ever expanding, moving
us into a faster, more efficient lifestyle. However, efficiency and advanced
technology are not without their price, and that fee, even more so than
monetary in nature, is more accurately quantified by an increased duress
on the environment and its inhabitants. As industry expands, waste products
increase, and often this waste is toxic to humans, plants, and animals.
So-called advancements, such as pesticides, which can greatly increase crop
production, may cause chronic health problems. Environmental stressors,
such as smelters, chemical plants, incinerators, and landfills all result
from efforts to improve the functioning of society, and all have adverse
effects on the populations living within proximity of these stressors (Bullard 1994).
The Problem
We have decided as a collective society to further our technology and expand
our industries at the cost of a less healthy environment. Because this decision
is one that affects all of us, we must be willing to take equal responsibility
for the harm done to the environment and to its inhabitants. Unfortunately,
white members of the middle and upper socio-economic classes have not accepted
the price of advancement, and have instead placed the burdens of our development
on lower socio-economic population and ethnic minorities. While it would
make sense that this group would be most fit to help alleviate the problem
of environmental damage and its ill-effects on health, because they hold
the most power and money in our society, logic has not ruled. Instead, the
white middle and upper class people have abused the power they have in the
form of environmental racism.
We take for granted, in the United States of America, that we are safe in our homes. At least, this is likely the perspective of the middle-class, white majority citizens, and in good reason. White middle-class people are, for the most part, not personally confronted by environmental risks. However, members of the ethnic minority and lower socio-economic class deal with issues of health and safety, as the environment, daily influences them. In 1987 Reverend Benjamin Chavis, Jr. coined the term "environmental racism" to describe the phenomena of the existence of racial inequalities as related to living conditions. Chavis defines environmental racism as:
ÖRacial discrimination in environmental policymaking, the enforcement of regulations and laws, the deliberate targeting of communities of color for toxic waste facilities, the official sanctioning of the life-threatening presence of poisons and pollutants in our communities, and the history of excluding people of color from leadership of the environmental movement." (Bullard 1994)
Environmental racism is not a modern manifestation; it has been documented since the early 20th century, and could be argued to have existed ever since the colonization of North America by white Europeans. According to Charles Lee, research director of the Commission for Racial Justice, the United States suffer today from a long history of oppression and exploitation of ethnic minorities. Racially aimed abuse is evident in "genocide, chattel slavery, indentured servitude, and racial discrimination in employment, housing and practically all aspects of life in the United States." (Bullard 1994) By the 1980's, researchers began to examine closely the relationship between race, poverty, and environmental conditions. Researches looked at the populations living in areas surrounded by hazardous waste sites of various kinds and in areas with poor air quality. Their data was consistent regardless of where the study was carried out; the people who live the closest to toxic waste sites and areas with a lot of air pollution are ethnic minorities and those who are poor.
Factors of Environmental Racism
Upon careful analysis, researchers determined that although economic variables
exist, the primary factor that determines the extent to which an individual
will be negatively affected by their environment is race (Bullard
1993). In 1992, Bryant and Mohai found that people of color face elevated
toxic exposure levels even when social class variables, such as income,
education, and occupation, are held constant. Many independent studies determined
race to be an independent factor, not reducible to class, in predicting
1) the distribution of air pollution (Freeman 1972; Gianessi, Peskin, and
Wolff 1979; Gelobter 1988; Wernette and Nieves 1992), 2) contaminated fish
consumption (West, Fly, and Marans 1990), 3) the location of community incinerators
and landfills (Bullard 1983, 1987, 1990, 1991), 4) the site of abandoned
toxic waste dumps (United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice
1987), and 5) lead poisoning in children (Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry 1988) (Bullard 1993). Economy
does play a role, but not to the extent that race does. For example, middle-income
African Americans are faced with many of the same environmental threats
as those with low income, while whites with middle-income are not confronted
by such problems (Bullard 1994).
Examples of Environmental Racism
Vernon County, California, located between South Central and East Los Angeles,
has been named the dirtiest county in California. Here, in 1989, 18 manufacturing
companies dumped 33 million pounds of chemicals into the environment. Vernon
County also houses waste dumps, smokestacks, and waste waterpipes. Interestingly,
the population of Vernon County is 59% African American and 38% Latin American.
Altgeld Gardens, of Chicago's Southeast Side, has a hazardous waste incinerator,
seven landfills, several chemical plants, two steel mills, a sludge-drying
factory, and pools filled with contaminants. Altgeld Gardens has one of
the highest cancer rates in the United States. As in Vernon County, African
Americans and Latin Americans primarily occupy the Southeast Side of Chicago.
"Cancer Alley" is an appropriate nickname for the 80-mile strip
along the Mississippi River between New Orleans and Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
This primarily African American region hosts over 100 oil refineries and
petrochemical plants that poison the land, air, and water (Bullard
1994).
The National Law Journal revealed some of these environmental inequities
in their 1992 study that examined the way the federal Environmental Protection
Agency enforces its laws:
There is a racial divide in the way the U.S. government cleans up toxic
waste sites and punishes polluters. White communities see faster action,
better results, and stiffer penalties than communities where blacks, Hispanics,
and other minorities live. This unequal protection often occurs whether
the community is wealthy or poor (Bullard 1992).
The journal also found that penalties for infringement of environmental
laws were 46% higher in white communities than in ethnic minority communities.
Abandoned hazardous waste sites in minority areas take up to 20% longer
to be placed on national priority list than those in white areas. At these
minority sites, the EPA more often chooses to deal with waste problems by
"containment" (walling off, or capping the hazardous waste), rather
than the preferable and permanent solution of "treatment" (elimination
of wastes and/or toxins). At the white hazardous waste sites, the EPA mandates
treatment 22% more often than containment (Bullard
1994). A plethora of examples evidencing environmental racism exist,
yet with the exception of the specific name of the community the scenarios
bear striking similarities: community, mostly comprised of African Americans
and/or Latin Americans, inundated with toxic waste, air pollution, water
contamination, while their white counterparts enjoy fresh air, clean water,
and a lovely landscape.
Health and Poor Environmental
Conditions
Incinerators, the leading technological method for disposal of wastes, are
a major source of lead, mercury, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's) released
into the environment. Mercury has been shown to effect the nervous system
and exposure to lead may lead to mental retardation and kidney disease (Bullard 1993). The Federal Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry has dubbed lead the "number one environmental
health threat to children." Ironically, the U.S. Public Health Service
set the safety standards for the safe level of lead in the blood at 10 mg/dl.
They failed to recognize that levels of this amount can cause a child's
IQ to be slightly decreased and growth to be stunted (Bullard
1994). PCB's that are released into the environment get absorbed in
and remain in the oils of plants and animals. They are also carried by water,
introducing them into the food chain. The levels of PCB contamination and
the number of people affected by it increase every year. In fact, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that 90% of the world's population has
measurable levels of PCB's in their bodies. Human breast milk contains PCB
levels so high that the nursing infant has PCB levels that exceed by 10%
the Food and Drug Administration's maximum daily intake. Animal studies
with PCB's have shown them to have a carcinogenic effect. They also cause
liver toxemia and interfere with reproduction. Large industries and automobiles
emit into the air carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, as well
as other pollutants, all of which negatively affect people with asthma.
These air pollutants may actually cause asthma, as it has been shown that
populations living in areas where the air quality is poor have a higher
prevalence of asthma (Bullard 1994).
Government Policy
The governmental policymakers have been forced to confront the issue of
environmental racism in light of the evidence of such studies as mentioned
above. The legal and political systems tend to protect large corporations
in the name of private property and free enterprise. However, laws exist
which as read, protect the rights of the individual. In 1976, the United
States Congress passed the Toxic Substances Control Act, which banned the
manufacturing or continued use of PCB's, except in sealed systems. The Environmental
Protection Agency proposed regulations that are more stringent for PCB's
in 1982. The EPA called for a ten-year phase out of all PCB containing capacitators.
Along with this, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reduced the safety
level of PCB's in food (dairy products) to less than 2.5 ppm. The National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health has recently reviewed the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and called for stricter standards
for worker exposure to environmental hazards. OSHA has failed to act in
response to this review. During the 1980s and 1990s, two major acts were
passed that confronted environmental racism: the Resource, Conservation,
and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the Comprehensive Environmental Responsibility,
Compensations, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Bullard
1994).
Both the Resource, Conservation, and Recovery Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Responsibility, Compensation, and Liability Act state that any newly generated hazardous waste needs to be managed in an approved facility. Furthermore, any land and structures on the land which are used for storage, treatment, or disposal of toxic waste, such as landfills and incinerators, fall under the regulation of the Environmental Protection Agency. More specifically, RCRA regulates the generation, storage, transport, treatment, and disposal of new hazardous waste. Under this law, the state and federal government share the responsibility of regulations. The act requires that states approve new sites for hazardous waste storage. CERCLA, also known as the "Superfund" act, authorizes the federal government to finance the cleanup of toxic waste sites. The monies for this clean up are obtained from a trust fund established with revenues from taxes imposed on petrochemicals, domestic crude oil, imported petrol products, and inorganic raw material. This act gives the federal government the authority to demand that parties responsible for causing the release or creation of toxic waste finance the cleanup and requires that states participate in cleanup action within their borders. Two amendments have been placed on CERCLA since its original inceptions. The first states that a health assessment must be performed for each family affected by uncontrolled toxic waste sites. The second amendment requires that the public be notified of and participate in the plans for remedial action in uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Since the EPA regulates both of these acts, a swift overview of the EPA guidelines is required (Bullard 1994).
In 1990, a group of environmental justice activists, civil rights leaders, and public health officials attended a conference entitled "Race and the Incidence of Environmental Health" at the University of Michigan. Because of this conference, the Environmental Protection Agency established an Environmental Equity Workgroup and an Office of Environmental Equity. The EPA also issued a final report, entitled "Environmental Equity: Reducing Risk for All Communities" (Bullard 1994). The EPA, the National Institute of Environmental Health, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry met together in 1992 to sponsor a forum "Equity in Environmental Health: Research Issues and Needs", in Durham, North Carolina. Also in 1992, Senators John Lewis (D) and Albert Gore introduced the "Environmental Justice Act of 1992" into Congress. Senator Paul Wellstone initiated the "U.S. Public Health Equity Act of 1994". These acts, which stated that all citizens, regardless of race, color, or national origin have the right to work and live in places that are safe from toxic chemicals, inspired President Bill Clinton to respond to environmental equity issues (Lancet 1994). In 1994, President Clinton issued an executive order forcing federal agencies to take into account racial factors in environmental policymaking. Pressed by environmental activists groups to further address the problem of environmental inequities, the Environmental Protection Agency issued new guidelines. These guidelines are based on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited recipients of federal funds from taking actions that disproportionately impact minorities (Payne 1998). Furthermore, the EPA will move to block any state or local government environmental policy that is alleged to have disparate impact on minorities. In effect, this means that the EPA overrules any environmental state laws and regulations (Bartlett 1998).
Environmental Activism
While the government has made progress in prioritizing the issue of environmental
inequity, various environmental groups have met the problem of environmental
racism head-on. These groups have a common goal of what they call environmental
justice. The framework of environmental justice consists of several basic
components: 1) it stresses the right of all individuals to be protected
from environmental degradation, 2) it adopts a public health model of prevention
(elimination of the threat before any harm occurs, 3) it allows disparate
impact and statistical weight, as opposed to "intent", to infer
discrimination, 4) it redresses disproportionate risk through targeted action
and resources (Bullard 1994).
There are a number of specific groups that deserve special attention for their ability to challenge the government's neglect of ethnic minorities right to a safe environment. Mothers of East Los Angeles (MELA) is a group of Latin American women who protested the building of a pipeline through their neighborhood. This pipeline made a 20 mile detour through the mostly Latin, poor community, to avoid disrupting the citizens of a wealthy white neighborhood. MELA also protested the building of yet another hazardous waste incinerator in East Los Angeles, and reigned victorious after a tedious three-year battle (Bullard 1994).
People United for a Better Oakland (PUEBLO) is a community group that raised public awareness of lead poisoning. Seventy percent of PUEBLO activists are of an ethnic minority and ninety percent of the members are low-income families of color. Between the years of 1990 and 1992, PUEBLO campaigned to eliminate the problem of lead poisoning in Oakland, California. This campaign is the most extensive lead-abatement plan on the West Coast (Bullard 1994).
Another group of mobilizers is the Southwest Organizing Project (SWOP). SWOP is a multi-racial community based organism located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. SWOP has initiated the formation of multiple organization to work locally against environmental racism. Specifically, they address issues such as water pollution, workplace contamination, lead poisoning, and landfills. Besides working locally, SWOP also dialogues with the government by writing letters to national environmental organizations and the Environmental Protection Agency (Bullard 1993).
Finally, the United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice, which was founded in 1963, is a Protestant-based civil rights organization that began to address environmental issues in the early 1980's. This Commission, of which Reverend Chavis, the originator of the term "environmental racism", acts as executive director, gathered together at the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit to establish a protocol for environmental justice. The Commission led a national study to evidence specific incidences of environmental racism. They took the results of this study, which documented examples of environmental racism to members representing the National Press Club, the Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources Defense Council. These token organizations do not come close to representing the overwhelming number of grass-roots groups that have taken firm stands against environmental injustice, and have pushed the federal government change policy and own up to their current unjust administration (Bullard 1993).
The Future
The future of the environmental justice movement on the level of group activism
as well as government policymaking is uncertain, however, society continues
to demand that environmental racism be addressed. Environmental justice
activists are seeking ways to ensure that the public and governmental bodies
become active participants in the movement. Activists suggest that the first
and most important step is to educate the public about their rights to a
safe environment. This education can be started in elementary schools, so
that the movement can continue for generations. In addition, communities
should establish forums, so that the local people can learn about 1) environmental
racism and 2) how to become activists. Environmental justice activists promote
direct action, such as petitioning, demonstrating, marching, and sitting-in.
Activists ask the government to accept the public voice as an active and
equal partner in research and environmental decision making. The Environmental
Equity Information Institute (E2I2) exists specifically to promote the fight
against environmental racism. They call for education, which includes 1)
providing information on pollution sources and prevention; 2) training community
leaders in prevention and monitoring techniques; and 3) working with communities
in conducting local economic development through environmentally related
job training. The E2I2 also has a community outreach program that provides
the public with interpretation of and access to environmental data bases;
help in collaborating with EPA Headquarters to provide information to communities;
aid in gathering and producing documents on best practices that can help
eliminate or reduce exposure to environmental hazards in and around the
home and community; and opportunities for interaction and dialogue with
relevant state and local environmental personnel (Environmental
Equity Information Institute 1998).
Environmental equity is not just a political issue. Churches should not shy away from the issue in order to remain separate from state policy; rather they can maintain their separation from government and still work against environmental racism. One way in which this can be done is to use scripture from the Bible as an argument for the equality of all individuals, regardless of race. Church groups can develop workshops and Sunday school lessons to teach members of the church about the inequalities in living conditions between minority populations and whites. This issue is obviously pertinent to Christian theology; Jesus' message to the people was one of justice and love of everyone. "Love your neighbor as yourself" can be used in counter-argument against the popular phrase "not in my backyard." The Biblical phrase forces me to think not only about myself. If I don't want hazardous waste in my backyard, my neighbor probably doesn't either. Finally, Church groups can be involved in experiential learning. Youth groups can visit areas such as Cancer Alley and Altgeld Gardens to see the effects of environmental racism and following this experience, the Church group can tell of their experience to other local churches.
Information about environmental racism is accessible; it need only be
taken advantage of. Educated activists need to continue to inform the victims
of environmental racism of their rights, and the whole society can work
together as a unified voice to keep the government policymakers accountable
for maintaining justice and equality. As aware citizens of the United States
of America, we will recognize that the environment belongs to everyone equally
and that everyone wants and deserves a safe home.
Bartlett, Bruce. "EPA's environmental
racism attacks will hurt blacks." Human Events.
July 1998, Volume 54:25.
Bullard, Robert D. Unequal Protection. Sierra Club Books: San Francisco, 1994.
Bullard, Robert D. Confronting Environmental Racism. South End Press: Boston, 1993.
Bullard, Robert D. Race and the Incidence of Environmental Hazards:
A time for
Discourse. Westville Press: Boulder, Colorado,
1992.
The Environmental Equity Information Institute.
World Wide Web, 1998.
Lawrence, D.P. "Approaches and Methods of Siting Locally Unwanted
Waste Facilities."
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.
June 1996, Volume 39:2.
"Less Equal than Others." Lancet. April 2, 1994, Volume 343:8901.
Payne, Henry. "Green Redlining."
Reason. October 1998, Volume 30:5.
Boerner, Christopher. "Environmental Injustice." Public
Interest. Winter 1995, Issue
118.
Bullard, Robert D. "Overcoming Racism in Environmental Decisionmaking."
Environment. May 1994, Volume 36:4.
Durning, Alan. Action at the Grassroots: fighting poverty and environmental
decline.
Worldswatch Institute: Washington D.C., 1989.
"Environmental Racism?" Wilson Quarterly. Spring 1995, Volume 19:2.
Sachs, Aaron. Eco-Justice: linking human rights and the environment.
Worldswatch
Insititute: Washington D.C., 1995.
Reilly, William K. "Environmental Equity: EPA's position."
EPA Journal. March/April
1992, Volume 18:1.